Volume 10, Issue 34
The tone and tenor of any Presidential address impacts, for good or bad, the psyche of the American people, and therefore, the depth and division of partisan elements in society.
President Biden personally attacked the former President of the United States by name. He labeled Donald Trump and his followers “an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.” In succeeding speeches this past weekend, he went on to call the MAGA platform just plain wrong.
Such personal attacks are designed to eviscerate conservatives in the body politic. President Biden followed the advice of political operatives.
Immediately in answer to the President’s invective accusations, both former President Trump and Minority Leader McCarthy decried the speech as desperate, without substance, and an effort to deflect the people’s rejection of President Biden’s leadership.
Recent research from ABC News indicates that 66% of the American public believe that the future of democracy is threatened. The same percent of both Republicans and Democrats come to this conclusion. National political leaders believe that their party base blames the other party. The strategy is to divide the public on issues and then paint the other party as so extreme that moderates will side with the candidates perceived to be less extreme or, by default, fail to vote.
The leaders of both parties are wrong in what they think the public desires from their leadership.
The citizens of the United States have been trying to tell their leaders that they perceive both parties are serving their own agendas instead of the public’s. The average voter is concerned about the stability of his or her own family. They take very seriously their citizen responsibility in the stewardship of their God-given authority over their families for the protection, growth, and destiny of their futures.
Several elected officials today, and the operatives who advise them, are insecure in their own political principles. Instead of telling the truth to the public and trusting the people to participate as partners in necessary solutions, they obfuscate the debate to avoid reality becoming the basis for a political decision. In other words, they do not have the confidence of truth in their own platforms.
There have been many times in history when one leader’s singular decision or rhetoric changed the course of history. At the critical moment of the public impression, the flow of events generated was not always apparent as to the ultimate outcome. A distinctive element of such decisions often revolves around the leader standing firm on the conviction of principle in the face of one’s advisors, operatives, and influencers.
Standing alone on principle trusting in faith the will of the people can render good fortune. Winston Churchill trusted the people and their desire to never give up. He rejected the recommendation from leaders of Parliament to sue for peace. The ultimate outcome of World War II hinged on his decision.
In addressing the world at the Berlin Wall June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan entreated President Gorbachev… “tear down this wall.” Few people realize that the words were not in his prepared remarks. His staff, the State Department, the CIA, and the NSA, had all advised that the words were too inflammatory. They demanded that the statement be removed. President Reagan wrote the words back into his speech while sitting on the platform. Two and one-half years later, the wall came down without bloodshed.
Sometimes a seminal decision can be made by a leader out of respect for humanity. And so it was with Mikhail Gorbachev.
In 1991, Ukraine declared independence from the Soviet Union. I was dispatched as a diplomat to advise on the ensuing Ukrainian referendum. Gorbachev initially sent Soviet tanks into the streets of Kiev. The army’s orders were to quell the rebellion, if necessary, by force. Gorbachev warned that there was a price to be paid for seeking democracy. I was briefed by the U.S.-Ukrainian attaché in Moscow that President George H.W. Bush had warned President Gorbachev that there was a price to be paid by nations who suppress the will of the people seeking freedom.
Ukrainians courageously proceeded with the elections not knowing what the Soviets would do.
President Gorbachev, in opposition to his own leadership council, singularly made the seminal decision to allow the Ukrainian elections to proceed without interference. Gorbachev believed that human blood was too precious to spill to maintain the power of a government. Ukrainians voted for independence by a super-majority of over 80%. Soon thereafter, other Soviet states spun out from under communist control. Within two months of the Ukrainian election for independence, the Soviet communist hammer and sickle flag was lowered for the last time over the Kremlin on December 25, 1991.
The Economist magazine states that, “Gorbachev liberated millions,” even if he didn’t set out to do so.
The American people today are disconnected from their political leaders. They simply want to be told how a particular issue impacts the one hope they have for the future, the continuity and the constitution of their families. Americans don’t hate each other. Yes, there are racial tensions. But overall, there is respect among ethnicities and cultures. Americans just want the freedom of opportunity to lead their lives, lead their families, and make their own choices in reference to their own pursuit of happiness.
What seems impossible to certain political leaders is common sense to the average citizen. Have faith in the will of the people that the people will do the right thing when given the freedom to make the choice.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?